Allowed

Shubham Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Apr 2023ABAIL/12651/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allows an anticipatory bail application filed by Shubham Gupta in a case under the Cow Slaughter Act and IPC. The court, relying on Supreme Court precedent, grants bail subject to specific conditions regarding cooperation with investigation, preventing tampering, and appearing in court.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released forthwith on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing two sureties and complying with imposed conditions.

Shubham Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 83 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12651 of 2022 Applicant :- Shubham Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Jamshed Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶3

List has been revised.

¶4

Heard Sri Mohd. Jamshed Khan, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ram Mohit Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶5

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.189 of 2019, registered under Sections 406, 188, 102-B I.P.C. and 3/5A/8 Cow Slaughter Act, at Police Station Adalhat, District Mirzapur with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶6

This is the second anticipatory bail application on behalf of the applicant. The first anticipatory bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 26.11.2021 for want of prosecution.

¶7

As per prosecution story, the applicant was entrusted three oxen which were confiscated under the provisions of Cow Slaughter Act. The applicant is stated to have redirected the said oxen to the animal mafia who is stated to have transported them to Bangladesh.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. Learned counsel has stated that the applicant is ready to return the said oxen which are with him as he is a bona fide person. There is no previous criminal history of the applicant, except a case under the UP Gangsters Act instituted subsequent to the present FIR. Learned counsel has stated that the applicant was granted interim protection vide order dated 27.1.2020 in the first anticipatory bail application and he has not misused the said liberty granted to him. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the

¶9

State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1" . The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶12

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Shubham Gupta be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

(i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii). that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶14

(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶15

(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶16

(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶17

(vi). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶18

(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶19

It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.

¶20

[Krishan Pahal, J.]

¶21

Order Date :- 18.4.2023/ Vikas

¶22

Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shubham Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shubham Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak and Another Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Sangita and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shakeel and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Furkan Vs State of U.P.

Sanjeev Manchanda Vs State of U.P. and Another

Keshav Ughan Jha Vs State of U.P. and Another